PLUME MODEL SCREEING MODULE

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

[0001] The present document is based on and claims priority to U.S. Provisional

Application Serial No. : 62/089,710, filed December 9, 2014, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

BACKGROUND

[0002] Oil and gas production from unconventional reservoirs has observed significant growth in the last few years. Despite the inherent nature of well completion operations (short duration, high-intensity), well completion and stimulation activities are perceived to impart environmental and social impact to the areas undergoing shale reservoir development.

SUMMARY OF THE CLAIMED EMBODIMENTS

[0003] In one aspect, embodiments disclosed herein relate to a method of inputting a first set of parameters of a wellbore operation in a sustainability screening tool and using the sustainability screening tool to model a plurality of environmental and social impact metrics, and determine the sustainability of the project based on the model.

[0004] In another aspect, embodiments disclosed herein relate to method of determining the sustainability of an oilfield service project. At least one set of parameters of the oilfield service project is selected for modelling and input into a user executable module. The user executable module then calculates, analyzes, and models one or more environmental and social impact metrics. The steps of selecting, inputting, calculating, analyzing, and modelling are repeated multiple times to produce multiple sustainability models. The multiple sustainability models are compared and the most environmentally and socially sustainable model is determined. The oilfield service project is then performed based on the determined model. [0005] In yet another aspect, embodiments disclosed herein relate to a method of modeling the sustainability of a wellbore operation using a sustainability screening tool. One or more variables related to a plurality of environmental and social impact metrics selected from a group consisting of water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, air emissions, environmental risk, traffic, road damage, noise, chemical screening, project safety, community exposure, and land disturbance group into one or more activity nodes selected from a group consisting of mobilization, demobilization, consumables transport, wellsite operations, flowback, disposal, and recycle is input into the sustainability screening tool. The sustainability screen tool then models the plurality of environmental and social impact metrics. The steps of inputting and modelling are repeated to generate a multiplicity of sustainability models with are compared to determine the sustainability of the project.

[0006] Other aspects and advantages will be apparent from the following description and the claims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0007] Figure 1 is an illustration of a hydraulic fracturing operation according to embodiments disclosed herein.

[0008] Figure 2 is a block flow diagram of a sustainability screening tool according to embodiments disclosed herein.

[0009] Figure 3 is a block flow diagram of a sustainability screening tool according to embodiments disclosed herein.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0010] A Sustainability Screening Tool (SST) has been developed to quantify a broad range of environmental and social impact metrics (ESMs) indicators for discussion and identification of sustainability opportunities. The tool facilitates a comprehensive evaluation of multiple ESM indicators that have been identified as relevant in tracking the overall environmental sustainability of well operations, such as those involved with the development of unconventional shale resources. ESMs are evaluated at multiple individual "activity nodes" that are grouped as distinct project phases of the well operation. For example, in the context of a hydraulic fracturing project cycle, the phases include Site Preparation, Equipment Mobilization, Consumables Transport, On Site Hydraulic Fracturing Operations, and Water Management and Disposition.

[0011] The Sustainability Screening Tool enables operators to make decisions based on environmental and social impact metrics to augment the commonly used financial and reservoir performance metrics. Moreover, the tool allows the operator to visualize what sustainability changes would look like on their projects. The tool also allows operators to quantify and communicate the metrics associated with environmental and social impacts from well operations.

[0012] The Sustainability Screening Tool provides a web-based computer implemented method for presenting comprehensive energy usage, air emissions, road damage, noise exposure, land disturbance, chemical handling and exposure, greenhouse gas generation, and water usage information for a plurality of well completions operations site activities and displaying the results as a comprehensive site report. One of the features of such example software is ease of use and modularity. The tool may also allow for custom workflows to be developed that couple traditional tools such as spreadsheets, graphs and charts into a portfolio creation and analysis tool that enables the user to glean relevance and insight from data. The modular nature of the technology may allow add-on applications that can serve several markets at once with low cost of development.

[0013] Oil and gas production from unconventional reservoirs has observed significant growth in the last few years. Despite the inherent nature of well completion operations (short duration, high-intensity), well completion and stimulation activities are perceived to impart significant environmental and social impact to the areas undergoing shale reservoir developments. One of the major challenges facing oil and gas operators involved with the development of unconventional resources is the ability to provide project transparency to local stakeholders who granted them the "social license to operate".

[0014] One or more embodiments disclosed herein relate to a Sustainability Screening

Tool that may aid in the planning and communication of these oil and gas operations. The planning provides a straightforward way to evaluate the interdependent relationships between parameters such as water usage, truck traffic, and on-site operations on local environment and infrastructure in a comprehensive manner.

[0015] The Sustainability Screening Tool, as described herein, has been developed to quantify a broad range of environmental and social impact metrics (ESM) indicators in an effort to improve the discussion and identify opportunities for sustainability improvements. The tool facilitates a comprehensive evaluation of multiple ESM indicators that have been identified as relevant in tracking the overall environmental sustainability of well completion operations involved with the development of unconventional shale resources. ESMs are evaluated at multiple individual "activity nodes" that are grouped as distinct project phases of the hydraulic fracturing project cycle including site preparation, equipment mobilization, consumables transport, onsite hydraulic fracturing operations, and water management and disposition.

[0016] The tool enables operators to make decisions based on environmental and social impact metrics to augment the commonly used financial and reservoir performance metrics. Moreover, the tool allows the user to visualize what sustainability improvements would look like on their projects. The tool also allows operators to quantify and communicate the metrics associated with environmental and social impacts from well completion operations, thereby improving the transparency of well completion operations at the project level.

[0017] While the Sustainability Screening Tool will be described herein with respect to a typical hydraulic fracturing operation, this is just for general illustrative purposes. The tool has been designed to be useful in all areas of wellbore operations, as well as many other large scale operations that may face similar environmental and social impact to the areas of deployment and operations. Specific examples provided below are presented to provide a comparative analysis of various well completion operational configurations in order to evaluate impacts such as water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, air emissions, environmental risk, traffic, road damage, noise, chemical screening, project safety, community exposure, and land disturbance.

[0018] The Sustainability Screening Tool is operated by a user who provides information based on the particular ESM being studied. For example, during an analysis of water usage, the user may input data on the quantity of water required for a fracturing stage, information on the sourcing and storage of the project water, and information on the management and disposal of flowback waters The tool may then automatically calculate the flowback water volume per stage based on a designated flowback percentage, and using a designated tanker capacity, provides the number of transport trucks required for both fresh water and flowback water transport. This information may be either viewed graphically, or in tabulated format where the user may also choose from a drop-down menu of transportation fuel options that include diesel, gasoline, biodiesels, liquefied natural gas (LNG), and compressed natural gas (CGN). Information on pipeline details or other infrastructure construction requirements can be input to support subsequent emissions calculations.

[0019] The ESMs that may be quantified by the Sustainability Screening Tool may be divided into one or more project areas, or activity nodes. For example, the Sustainability Screening Tool breaks the hydraulic fracturing project cycle down in to multiple distinct "activity nodes" in order to characterize the environmental and social impact metrics (ESM) indicators associated with each major phase of the project, which include mobilization and demobilization of equipment and infrastructure, consumable materials transport, hydraulic fracturing operations at well pad, flowback/produced water transport, flowback disposal or reuse.

[0020] The Sustainability Screening Tool may be customized for comparative analysis function in which the user may set up for individual projects (identified by client, geographic location, specific shale, etc.) and evaluate specific cases or scenarios within a project. The tool calculates sustainability metrics at each of the activity node to be studied.

[0021] Referring now to Fig. 1, each of the activity nodes for a typical hydraulic fracturing job are illustrated, as well as where key sustainability performance indicators are estimated for subsequent comparative analysis. The activity nodes begin with mobilization and demobilization 100 of people 102 and mobilization and demobilization of equipment and infrastructure 104. [0022] The Sustainability Screening Tool allows for the user to input data related to all consumable sources and transport 200. The consumables may be one or more of fuel 202, trucked water 204, piped water 206, chemicals 208, acids 210, and proppants 212. The user may also input data related to transport of the consumables. Transportation activity nodes may be one or more of fuel transport 214, trucked water transport 216, piped water transport 218, chemicals transport 220, acids transport 222, and proppants transport 224.

[0023] After the user has entered the data for all the desired consumables sources and transportation 200, data for the onsite operations activity nodes 300 may be entered. The activity nodes related to storage of consumables may be one or more of fuel tanker operations 302, water storage operations (such as in fracturing tanks) 304, chemical storage operations (such as in chemical floats) 306, acid storage operations 308, and proppant storage operations 310.

[0024] Other onsite operation activity nodes 300 may include the activities directly related to formation of a completed wellbore, such as the pumping of materials downhole in a hydraulic fracturing operation. In a hydraulic fracturing operations, those onsite activity nodes may be one or more of refueling of onsite equipment used in the well operation 312, water transfer to liquid additive systems 314, chemical transfer to liquid additive systems 316, chemical bypass of liquid additives to blender (without passing through a liquid additive system) 318, acid transfer to blender 320, proppant transfer to blender 322, liquid additive system transfer to blender 324, blender transfer to high pressure pumps 326, slurry injection to well 328, wire line truck operations 330, flowback capture operations 332, and on site ancillary equipment operations 334.

[0025] After the user has entered the data for all the onsite operation activity nodes 300, activity node data for flowback 400 and disposal 500 may be entered. The activity nodes related to flowback 400 and disposal 500 may be one or more of flowback water transport 402, deepwell disposal of flowback water 502, treatment of flowback water 502, reuse of flowback water 506, and non-flowback waste recycle 508.

[0026] Together, these activity notes make up a typical hydraulic fracturing operation.

Depending on the particulars of the desired operation, a subset of the activity nodes may be quantified, or all the activity nodes may be quantified. The activity nodes may be grouped into one or more ESMs using the Sustainability Screening Tool. The ESMs may be water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, air emissions, environmental risk, traffic, road damage, noise, chemical screening, project safety, community exposure, and land disturbance. Each of these ESMs are explained in detail below.

[0027] AIR EMISSION

[0028] The air emissions involved in hydraulic fracturing operations, or oilfield operations in general, can include carbon monoxide (CO), lead, nitrogen oxides (NOx), ozone, particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (S02), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). These VOCs can include air toxins and other pollutants, including fugitive emissions generated from mixing chemicals, spills, and flowback fluids. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, such as carbon dioxide (C02) and methane (CH4), may also be associated with wellbore operations.

[0029] In addition to emissions from diesel combustion, truck traffic on roads can produce significant quantities of dust with implications for the levels of particulate matter associated with shale gas extraction. Such particulates are typically measured by size, such as PM2.5 and PM10. The most significant source of PM2.5 and PM10 in the United States is dust. For example, it is estimated that nearly 17 kg of PM2.5 are produced per wellsite as a result of mobile road dust emissions.

[0030] The Sustainability Screening Tool allows users to use a pre-defined set of a emissions factors, as well as wellsite emissions modelling to quantify and unify air emissions for each desired activity node. The amount of each emission can be calculated and compared to other wellbore projects, or the input data may be modified so that an environmentally sustainable project plan is found.

[0031] FUEL ECONOMY

[0032] The Sustainability Screening Tool allows for the quantification of the fuel necessary for a wellbore operation. The tool allows for a user to input data related to the trucks, diesel pumps, and the like, used in the operation. For example, the user can input data on the class of truck, the model year of the trucks, engine idle speed, transport capacity, truck weight, truck capacity, time spent idle, miles traveled, road type, fuel type, fuel economy, and percentage of time idle. Using all these factors, the user is able to plan out how much fuel will be needed for each activity node of the project.

[0033] DIESEL ENGINE EMISSION FACTORS

[0034] The biggest engines conventionally at the wellsite are associated with the fracturing pumps, which are designed for supplying high horsepower (hp) during fracturing operations. These engines are compression-ignition type rated at 2,250 hp.

[0035] The Sustainability Screening Tool may calculate on-site engine emissions using a modification of the EPA NONROAD emissions model using the emissions factors for non-road compression-ignition engines. The concept of a load factor average (LFA) is calculated by averaging the load while pumping and the load while at reserve power. The formula for calculating the LFA is:

LFA = (LF@pumping (%) x Time pumping (hi)) + (LF@RP(%) ^χ TimeRP (hi))

[0036] where,

RP= Reserve Power

LF= Load Factor

[0037] As shown, the Sustainability Screening Tool incorporates not only the time spent pumping, but the time at reserve power. By doing this, the user can quantify the total load factor average for each activity node, whether that particular pump is in full operation or not.

[0038] Additionally, the user may input data related to engine type, fuel type, etc., and the Sustainability Screening Tool will calculate the amount of emissions each onsite pump will generate at each activity node, such as in pumping a fracturing fluid downhole. The user may also define the onsite diesel engine NOx emission factor per brake horsepower hour (g/bhphr) for each pump type onsite and the PM10 emission factor for each pump type. [0039] In addition to diesel engines for pumps, the user may also define transportation diesel engines in the Sustainability Screening Tool. For each unit of transportation equipment the emission factors and fuel economies for heavy-duty diesel engines for transportation emissions may be calculated. This information is then summed with the diesel engines for pumps to provide a total of the air emissions and fuel use.

[0040] The Sustainability Screening Tool uses information for diesel emission factors obtained from sources such as the USEPA SmarfWay 2011 Truck Tool Technical Documentation, the USEPA Heavy-Duty Highway Compression-Ignition Engines and Urban Buses Exhaust Emission Standards, from the USEPA. Nonroad Emission Factors for Frac Pumps (EPA. 2008), and the USEPA Nonroad Compression Ignition Engines Exhaust Emission Standards.

[0041] WORKER TRANSPORTATION SAFETY EVENTS

[0042] The Sustainability Screening Tool provides transportation worker safety statistics by using the idle time percentage and a default vehicle speed of 50 mile per hour (mph), to calculate the total travel time for each vehicle. Using the appropriate OSHA Industry Incident Factor (OSHA 2010), the tool estimates the number of transportation related incidents that can be anticipated on the project using the following equations:

I = (r*t)/c

[0043] where,

I = number of incidents r = truck incident rate t = time in hours c = incident constant [0044] ROAD WEAR

[0045] The Sustainability Screening Tool may estimate infrastructure (road wear) damage by calculating the number of ton miles of shipments associated with the project and then calculating the equivalent single axle load (ESAL) for each transport vehicle. The individual values are summed to provide a project level ESAL estimate that can be used to project road deterioration rates based on truck activity levels.

[0046] NOISE

[0047] Noise impacts on both onsite workers and community receptors may be calculated using professional sound level tables, and are determined based on the distance from the receptor and source sound, and time of day. Resources incorporated in to the noise evaluation database are publically available sources which include the Sound Level Database from E-A-RCAL Laboratory, FHWA Construction Noise Handbook, and California Land Use Compatibility Noise Guidelines.

[0048] The Equation below is used to calculate the equipment-specific sound emission level (sound level) at a user-specified distance based on a given value.

[0049] where,

L _eq = equipment specific emission level at specified distance D

Lref = equipment specific emission level at reference distance D _re f (measured value)

D = distance, in feet, between the equipment and the receptor

Dref = reference distance where L _re f was measured

U.F. = time-averaging equipment usage factor, expressed in percent

[0050] CHEMICAL SCREENING

[0051] The Sustainability Screening Tool can also be used to calculate the inherent chemical hazard for each chemical at each activity node using its specific concentration. The user supplies concentration information for each chemical, at each node, which is used to "scale" the inherent health, physical, and environmental hazards associated with each chemical following the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). The resulting data can be used to produce information on potential worker, community, and environmental exposures.

[0052] The Sustainability Screening Tool may utilize any available chemical scoring database or databases for evaluating potential hazards. One example is the Chemical Scoring Index (CSI) which can be used to evaluate the potential exposure hazards to the on-site worker, environment, and community receptors associated with the sourcing, transportation, handling, storage, and injection of the chemical additives utilized at the well site.

[0053] The CSI compiles and ranks intrinsic chemical hazard properties for products designed for the same use so that products can be compared based on their relative potential health, physical safety, and environmental hazards.

[0054] One advantage of the CSI compared to other available hazard ranking tools is that the CSI was developed to rank products (which may contain one or more chemicals), while other tools are focused on individual chemicals. In the CSI, a health hazard score, an environmental hazard score, and a physical safety hazard score are given to each of the product chemical components and these scores are added together to compile a total hazard score for the product. Products that score lowest within a product-use-group have a lower intrinsic hazard and can potentially be considered as more environmentally responsible.

[0055] The CSI defines the health hazard criterion as addressing worker health, whereas the environmental hazard criterion addresses ecological health as well as population based human health. This is a broader definition of the environmental hazard criterion than found elsewhere. Each criterion consists of several hazard categories, including those defined in the GHS system, supplemented with additional non-GHS hazard categories. The following hazard categories are included within each criterion in the CSI.

[0056] Health Criterion: carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, reproductive toxicity, endocrine disruptors, sensitizers, acute toxicity, corrosivity, acute target organ toxicity, chronic target organ toxicity, and aspiration. [0057] Environmental Criterion: acute aquatic toxicity, chronic aquatic toxicity, ozone depletion, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), hazardous water pollutants (HWPs), biodegradation, and bioaccumulation.

[0058] Physical Safety Criterion: explosive, pyrotechnic, flammable gas, oxidizing gas, gases under pressure, flammable liquid, flammable solid, self-reactive substance, pyrophoric, self-heating substance, emit flammable gas in contact with water, oxidizing liquids.

[0059] While the Sustainability Screening Tool is described as using the CSI as the basis for its chemical screening capabilities, this component of the tool is easily replaceable by other chemical screening indexes. The Sustainability Screening Tool also allows for individual user defined indexes which may be based on public perception or "rule-of- thumb" for a particular chemical or onsite process.

[0060] GAUSSIAN PLUME MODEL

[0061] The Sustainability Screening Tool also incorporates a Gaussian Plume Model to allow for a screening level assessment of the distribution of airborne contaminants. This may allow the user to facilitate a better understanding of the transport of the airborne contaminants generated as a result of engine combustion, transport, operations, and materials handling, allowing users to predict how far potential airborne contaminants will travel from well sites. This could be valuable information in those situations where a wellbore is in close proximity to potential agricultural, pastoral, or human receptors.

[0062] The Gaussian model assumes that the air pollutant dispersion has a Gaussian distribution, meaning that the pollutant distribution has a normal probability distribution. Gaussian models are most often used for predicting the dispersion of continuous, buoyant air pollution plumes originating from ground-level or elevated sources. Gaussian models may also be used for predicting the dispersion of non-continuous air pollution plumes (called puff models). The primary algorithm used in Gaussian modeling is the generalized dispersion equation for a continuous point-source plume. [0063] In one or more embodiments, the Gaussian model is incorporated as part of a comprehensive predictive Sustainability Screening Tool that allows the user to evaluate the potential downwind dispersion of potential air impacts from wellbore operations.

[0064] The technical basis for the screening tool is based on the following general equation: c 9i + <h -4- £¾

where:

crosswind dispersion parameter

9 vertical dispersion parameter = 9l ^~ ! ^~ 82 ^~ H &

Si vertical dispersion with no reflections

exp [— (z— II} ² / (2 σ? ) ]

92 vertical dispersion for reflection from the ground

vertical dispersion for reflection from an inversion

+ exp [— {z ^■ ÷- H + 2mL)"/ (2 n't )

+ exp I (z + H ^{■■■■■} ml†l (2 <r?

+ exp !— ( z— H + 2mL} ² / (2 σ

c ^: concentration of emissions, in g/m ³ , at any receptor located:

x meters downwind from the emission source point

y meters crosswind from the emission plume centerline

z meters above ground level

Q = source pollutant emission rate, in g/s

U horizontal wind velocity along the plume centerline, m/s u height of emission plume centerline above ground level, in m = vertical standard deviation of the emission distribution, in m

= horizontal standard deviation of the emission distribution, in m

j = height from ground level to bottom

of the inversion aloft, in m

t5 p = the exponential function

[0065] Based on the input parameters provided, the Sustainability Screening Tool can be used to evaluate downwind dispersion for a number of air quality parameters, including, but not limited to nitrous oxides, sulfur oxides, PM2.5, PM10, and volatile organic chemicals.

[0066] The Gaussian model allows the user to input various characteristics of the air emission and environmental properties, such as wind speed and direction, air temperature, terrain, etc. The model will perform the necessary internal components to perform the calculations using the above equations and output a graphical depiction of the Gaussian model. This graphical output provides the user with a visual interpretation of the calculation results, which may also be overlaid on satellite or aerial maps and provide a real world dispersion pattern (a visual estimate of the distribution of potential air impacts both at the well pad and for potential offsite receptors) which the general public can easily see and understand.

[0067] PROPERTY RESTORATION COSTS

[0068] The Sustainability Screening Tool may incorporate the concept of the valuation of ecological services and the values of ecosystem services by using these valuations to estimate the restoration costs associated with land disturbance during the well completion project operations. This provides a standardized methodology to assess the economic impacts of unconventional development on the local stakeholders. The tool allows the user to look at emissions at the individual equipment line-item level or at the project- activity level. [0069] The restoration cost of the land disturbance may the be calculated by the following formula: c = d*w

[0070] where, c = cost of restoration d = amount of land disturbance w = previous ecological worth

[0071] Typical user input information needed to perform an assessment using the tool includes one or more of number of stages, stage duration, amount of proppant per stage, number of units of equipment mobilized to site, number of units of equipment utilized on site, water delivery mode, flowback water percentage, water reuse percentage, consumables transport distance, on-site equipment engine specifications, consumables per stage requirements (water, acid, chemical additives), project schedule, crew size, shift length, worker noise exposure distance, community noise exposure distance, fuel type, miles paved, and project location.

[0072] Other metrics which may be quantified by the Sustainability Screening Tool include:

[0073] Calculation and modeling of water granularity. Such models may accurately calculate the amount of fresh water vs. recycled water that needs to be used on a job.

[0074] Compare different transportation routes via aerial or satellite imagery, or a similar technology. Given several wells in a field that need to be fractured within the same time frame, it may be useful to optimize the order in which the wells are fractured. This sequence planning could minimize transportations costs, for example.

[0075] As mentioned above, the tool quantifies these multiple metrics from the input data for each of the activity nodes. Further, while the data is input for individual activity nodes (with separate consideration, for example, of a particular consumable such as guar, water, or acid at different phases of the well operation), the tool is comprehensive in that the tool may link various activity nodes together and automatically consider and calculate a value for a given activity node based on manual input at another activity node.

[0076] For example, for water used at a hydraulic fracturing site, the volume or quantity of water that is to be used for the fracturing (per stage with the number of stages) may be manually inputted or may be exported from a design tool (discussed in further detail below). In addition the volume of water will also have sourcing activities and storage activities, and will also implicate management and disposal of flowback waters. The tool can automatically calculate the flowback water volume per stage based on a designated flowback percentage, and using a designated tanker capacity, provides the number of transport trucks appropriate for the fresh water and flowback water transport. Given the implication of the transport trucks, the tool may request user input for selection of transportation fuel options. Further, the volume of water may also impact the transfer of water to a liquid additive system, the transfer of the contents of the liquid additive system (including the water, together with other chemicals) to the blender, the transfer of the contents of the blender (the water and chemicals from the liquid additive system together with chemicals, acid, and proppant transferred directly to the blender) to the high pressure pumps, where high pressure pumps pump the slurry (blend of water, chemicals, acid, and/or proppant) into the well. Each of these activity nodes may have other input requirements, such as for example, equipment type, pumping rates, so that the amount of fuel (which also has to be transported) powering the pumps can be calculated. Thus, the volume of water impacts many activity nodes, and the tool allows for the integrated consideration of the various activity nodes, in calculating the resulting ESMs for an operation.

[0077] Further, by quantifying these ESMs, a user can evaluate which stage of the well operation (and thus which activity node(s)) makes the greatest contributions to the various ESMs, which also allows a user to compare the comprehensive impact of changes in one or more activity nodes on the ESMs (for example, when reducing an ESM on one particular phase of the operation, comparing the impact on the same ESM or other ESMs on other phases of the operation). For example, changing a well operation to use on-site water wells (eliminating the trucking of fresh water to the well pad) results in the elimination of a large number of tanker trucks for fresh water delivery, and at an example site using 315,000 gallons of water per stage, the change in water sourcing results in a reduction in emissions for the consumable transport phase with a 99.31% reduction in NOx, a 99.35% reduction in SOx, a 99.35% reduction in PM10, and a 99.35% reduction in C0 ₂ .

[0078] It is also envisioned that the tool may be used in the analysis of the drilling and production phases of a well, and/or analysis of multiple wells present at a single well pad. Additionally, multiple well pads may also be analyzed. This would allow users to compare different options for performing operations on a group of wells or a group of well pads.

[0079] Further, the tool may be integrated with wellsite design tools such as geomechanical modeling tools and hydraulic fracturing simulators including Schlumberger's Pore Pressure Prediction (PPP), Mangrove, and FracCADE. Completed designs from these design tools may be exported to the Sustainability Screening Tool. The designs would be used to auto-fill many of the input fields. A direct link could also be made between any of these design tools and the Sustainability Screening Tool, in which an environmental and sustainability evaluation becomes part of the normal well operation design process.

[0080] In one or more embodiments described herein is a process for quantifying the sustainability of an oil and gas production process with a Sustainability Screening Tool. The Sustainability Screening Tool is a web-based software application that provides comprehensive energy usage, air emissions, road damage, noise exposure, community exposure, land disturbance, chemical handling and exposure, and water usage information for wellsite activities and displays the results as a comprehensive site report. The software allows for custom workflows that couple traditional tools such as spreadsheets, graphs and charts into a portfolio creation and analysis tool, enabling users to glean relevance and insight from data (i.e., data analytics for well completions projects). [0081] Referring now to Fig. 2, a block flow diagram of the use of a Sustainability

Screening Tool is illustrated. The user may input data, corresponding to one or more activity nodes, in the user interface 1. The input data is fed to Sustainability Screening Tool 10, which comprises sustainability engine 5. The sustainability engine 5 may also call on one or more external databases 2 for lookup values. The lookup values may also be pulled from one or more user defined variable sets 3. After all the input data has been populated, the sustainability engine 5 may look up any additional information from a local database 4, which may include prior wellsite data, and begin calculation in the sustainability engine 5. The output of the sustainability engine 5 will populate an output interface 6, which may be graphical, tabulated data, or both, which the user may use to develop a sustainable project model.

[0082] Referring now to Fig. 3, a block flow diagram of the use of a Sustainability

Screening Tool is illustrated. As described with respect to Fig. 2, the user may input data in the user interface 1, which is fed to a sustainability engine 5. The sustainability engine will populate an output interface 6, which the user may use to develop a sustainable project model. Additionally, the output interface 6 may feed the output data to a project design engine 7. The project design engine 7 may be any one of geomechanical modeling tools and hydraulic fracturing simulators as described above.

[0083] The user interface 1 and project design engine 7 may be interconnected such that the user populated data may influence the project design engine 7, or the project design engine output may change the user inputted data, or both. In doing so, the Sustainability Screen Tool 10 may operate an iterative loop which may allow the user to quickly compare multiple project designs and determine an appropriate environmentally friendly project design based on client need, project location, and type of shale.

[0084] Many types of data input may be used for the Sustainability Screening Tool related to data for sustainability modeling, including but not limited to user defined variables, publicly available data, prior wellsite data, and any other relevant information. As the number of ESMs and activity nodes increases, more data input may be necessary. [0085] Further, in some embodiments, multiple sustainability models may be required. In such embodiments, for example, a different chemical scoring index, Gaussian dispersion model, or other wellsite project parameters may be used.

[0086] According to one or more embodiments described herein is a method for determining the environmental sustainability of a gas and oilfield project. A user may input a first set of parameters of a wellbore operation in a sustainability screening tool. The sustainability screening tool models a plurality of environmental and social impact metrics which the user may use to determine the sustainability of the project based on the model.

[0087] The user may also input one or more additional sets of parameters of the project in the sustainability screening tool. The sustainability screening tool may then model a plurality of environmental and social impact metrics, and compare the models given by the first and at least a second set of parameters. Using the comparison, the user may repeat these steps, as necessary, to select a project model which meets specific criteria for sustainability. After a suitable model is selecting, the wellbore operation may be performed.

[0088] After a sustainable model is selected, and the wellbore operation is performed, the user may compare the model with values obtained from the performed wellbore operation. This comparison may allow the user to calibrate the sustainability screening tool for future models.

[0089] According to another embodiment as disclosed herein, is a method for determining the sustainability of an oilfield service project. A user may select at least one set of parameters of an oilfield service project for modelling and input these parameters into a user executable module. The module may then calculate and analyze one or more environmental and social impact metrics, repeating these steps as necessary and modelling each set of parameters. The user may then compare the multiple sustainability models and determine the most environmentally and socially sustainable model. The comparison may be done visually, numerically, or a combination of both. Based on this model, the oilfield service project may then be performed. [0090] The environmental and social impact metrics may be grouped into one or more activity nodes. The activity nodes may be selected from a group consisting of mobilization, demobilization, consumables transport, wellsite operations, flowback, disposal, and recycle, while the environmental and social impact metrics may be selected from a consisting of water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, air emissions, environmental risk, traffic, road damage, noise, chemical screening, project safety, community exposure, and land disturbance. Each environmental and social impact metric may be grouped into one activity node, multiple activity nodes, or all activity nodes.

[0091] According to yet another embodiment disclosed here is a method of modeling the sustainability of a wellbore operation with a sustainability screening tool. A use may input one or more variables related to a plurality of environmental and social impacted metrics grouped into one or more activity nodes. The sustainability screening tool may then model the plurality of environmental and social impact metrics. The steps of inputting and modelling may be performed a multiplicity of times to generate a multiplicity of sustainability models, which may then be compared. Based on the comparison, the sustainability of the project may be determined.

[0092] Modeling software may be used to generate a Gaussian plume distribution model over real world aerial or satellite imagery. Such outputs may predict specific areas of inhabited land for pollutant distribution. For example, modeling software may be used to predict the amount of airborne dust generated by transportation, and where such dust is likely to go. According to some embodiments, a system for generating a model of a sustainability model, including a Gaussian plume, may include a computer processor and memory having instructions executing on the computer processor with functionality to receive parameters of the formation (e.g., from data acquisition) and to model a mechanical earth model of the formation based on the parameters. In some embodiments, a system may also include at least one sensor in communication (e.g., wired or wireless communication) with a computer processor running modeling software, where the sensor(s) may measure at least one parameter of the formation. [0093] Modeling software may be used to simulate a sustainability model for an oil and gas production process of interest. According to embodiments of the present disclosure, the modeling software for sustainability modelling may take into account water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, air emissions, environmental risk, traffic, road damage, noise, chemical screening, project safety, community exposure, and land disturbance in one or more of the activity nodes corresponding to mobilization, demobilization, consumables transport, wellsite operations, flowback, disposal, and recycle.

[0094] Each stage of the model that can be physically calibrated after a project has been started may be calibrated in the planning too in a multistage process. Calibrating may include updating one or more input parameters of the combined output of the Sustainability Screening Tool to match the modeled to match the ESMs of the physically completed wellbore project.

[0095] Calibrating stages in a multistage process as they are completed with a real world analog of the multistage process may allow for correction in the simulation model and provide greater accuracy in predicting ESMs of a given activity node for future projects. For example, if a physically completed activity node of a multistage process results in higher than expected air emissions or fuel consumption, one or more subsequent stages of the multistage process may be adjusted to correct the discrepancies.

[0096] A computing system, according to one or more embodiments disclosed herein includes a computing device having one or more computing processors, one or more storage devices (e.g., a hard disk, an optical drive such as a compact disk (CD) drive or digital versatile disk (DVD) drive, a flash memory stick, etc.), memory (e.g., random access memory (RAM), cache memory, flash memory, etc.), and a graphical user interface (GUI). The computing processor(s) may be an integrated circuit for processing instructions. For example, the computing processor(s) may be one or more cores, or micro-cores of a processor. The storage device(s) (and/or any information stored therein) may be a data store such as a database, a file system, one or more data structures (e.g., arrays, link lists, tables, hierarchical data structures, etc.) configured in a memory, an extensible markup language (XML) file, any other suitable medium for storing data, or any suitable combination thereof. The storage device(s) may be a device internal to the computing device, or the storage device(s) may be an external storage device operatively connected to the computing device. According to some embodiments, the storage device(s) may include a data repository having stored parameters from real/physical oilfield operation and/or stored parameters from previously performed simulations, where at least one of the stored parameters may be submitted parameters for simulation of a oilfield operation. Additionally, the computing device may include numerous other elements and functionalities.

[0097] The computing device may be communicatively coupled to a network (e.g., a local area network (LAN), a wide area network (WAN) such as the Internet, mobile network, or any other type of network) through wires, cables, fibers, optical connectors, a wireless connection, or a network interface connection.

[0098] The computing system may also include one or more input device(s), such as a touchscreen, keyboard, mouse, microphone, touchpad, electronic pen, or any other type of input device. Further, the computing system may include one or more output device(s), such as a screen (e.g., a liquid crystal display (LCD), a plasma display, touchscreen, cathode ray tube (CRT) monitor, projector, 2D display, 3D display, or other display device), a printer, external storage, or any other output device. One or more of the output device(s) may be the same or different from the input device(s). The input and output device(s) may be locally or remotely (e.g., via the network) connected to the computer processor(s), memory, storage device(s), and GUI. Many different types of computing systems exist, and the aforementioned input and output device(s) may take other forms.

[0099] Further, one or more elements of the computing system may be located at a remote location and connected to the other elements over a network. Further, embodiments of the disclosure may be implemented on a distributed system having nodes, where each portion of the disclosure may be located on a different node within the distributed system. In one embodiment of the disclosure, the node corresponds to a distinct computing device. In another embodiment, the node may correspond to a computer processor with associated physical memory. In another embodiment, the node may correspond to a computer processor or micro-core of a computer processor with shared memory and/or resources.

[00100] The GUI may be operated by a user (e.g., an engineer, a designer, an operator, an employee, or any other party) using one or more input devices and the GUI may be visualized one or more output devices coupled to the computing device. The GUI may include one or more buttons (e.g., radio buttons), data fields (e.g., input fields), banners, menus (e.g., user input menus), boxes (e.g., input or output text boxes), tables (e.g., data summary tables), sections (e.g., informational sections or sections capable of minimizing/maximizing), screens (e.g., welcome screen or home screen), and/or user selection menus (e.g., drop down menus). In addition, the GUI may include one or more separate interfaces and may be usable in a web browser or as a standalone application.

[00101] Although the output device(s) is associated as being communicatively coupled to the computing device, the output device(s) may also be a component of the computing device.

[00102] The computing device may execute instructions on the computing processor(s) to perform a simulation based on the formation and stimulation parameters selected or submitted by the user. Executing the simulation generates a set of predicted parameters (e.g., sustainability modeling of a wellbore operation including water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, air emissions, environmental risk, traffic, road damage, noise, chemical screening, project safety, and community exposure, land disturbance in one or more of the activity nodes corresponding to mobilization, demobilization, consumables transport, wellsite operations, flowback, disposal, and recycle).

[00103] After simulation, one or more predicted parameters may be visualized by the GUI on the output device(s), such as a Gaussian plume model. In one embodiment, the visual outputs may include graphs depicting the air emissions, fuel usage, particulate matter, or chemical hazards. Additionally, the outputs may be in the form of tabular data of one or more predicted parameters and/or graphs and may be represented as percentages or ratios. [00104] Once presented with the predicted parameters, the user may modify one or more of the input parameters to reduce potential of generating induced environmental and social hazards from a stimulation or other well operation. Modification may involve selecting a parameter from pre-existing values or inputting the parameter to obtain a modified value. For example, a different volume of chemical injected into the formation may be inputted in the simulation.

[00105] According to some embodiments, at least one of the parameters submitted into a computer processor for designing a stimulation of a formation may be modified based on one or more predicted parameters from a previous stimulation simulation performed by the computer processor, wherein modifying includes changing a value of at least one input parameter to obtain a modified input parameter. A second predicted parameter from a subsequent simulation may be presented on a graphical user interface, where the subsequent simulation is based on the modified input parameter. The predicted parameters from each simulation may be compared to determine optimized input parameters. Further, a user may specify particular constraints with respect to one or more input parameters during simulation.

[00106] After modification, a second simulation may be executed by the computing device. The second simulation may include the modified input parameter. The second simulation may be executed by the computing device using the processor(s) to generate a second set of predicted parameters. The second simulation may be performed using one or more of the methods set forth above. Once generated, the initial set of predicted parameters along with the second set of predicted parameters may be presented using GUI and output device(s). The sets of predicted parameters may be presented to the user for comparison and may be presented separately or combined. The sets of predicted parameters may be presented or visualized, for example, using models, plots, graphs, charts, and logs.

[00107] Additionally, a second simulation may occur simultaneously with the first simulation. For example, a user may select any number of input parameters of a stimulation of a formation to operate in particular operating conditions. The user may then run a number of simulations and compare resulting outputs (e.g., predicted parameters) to one another. Furthermore, the simulation and thus, the comparison, may be done in real-time. More specifically, the engineer may run a number of simulations for a given stimulation scenario and observe performance as the simulation progresses. Furthermore, the predicted parameters may be acquired and/or measured in the field. The results from one or more simulations may then be used to compare to one or more field acquired/measured parameters. ] Although only a few example embodiments have been described in detail above, those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that many modifications are possible in the example embodiments without materially departing from this disclosure. Accordingly, all such modifications are intended to be included within the scope of this disclosure as defined in the following claims. In the claims, means-plus-function clauses are intended to cover the structures described herein as performing the recited function and not only structural equivalents, but also equivalent structures. Thus, although a nail and a screw may not be structural equivalents in that a nail employs a cylindrical surface to secure wooden parts together, whereas a screw employs a helical surface, in the environment of fastening wooden parts, a nail and a screw may be equivalent structures. It is the express intention of the applicant not to invoke 35 U.S.C. § 1 12, paragraph 6 for any limitations of any of the claims herein, except for those in which the claim expressly uses the words 'means for' together with an associated function.